ACLU Reverses Course on DOJ Investigation of Zimmerman

There must have been some heated discussions going on behind the scenes at the ACLU for it to do a 180 degree u-turn on whether the Department of Justice should investigate George Zimmerman to determine whether a hate crime prosecution was appropriate. I'm not surprised, just relieved the organization came to its senses.

On July 14, ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero issued a statement on behalf of the organization that was titled, "Honoring the Memory of the Trayvon Martin (Next Steps for Systemic Reforms.) It called on the DOJ to investigate whether George Zimmerman's committed a federal civil rights violation or a hate crime by shooting Trayvon Martin.

This case reminds us that it is imperative that the Department of Justice thoroughly examine whether the Martin shooting was a federal civil rights violation or hate crime.

On July 18, 2013, just 4 days later, the ACLU wrote this letter to Attorney General Eric Holder protesting even the consideration of bringing federal civil rights or hate crime charges against George Zimmerman.

We are writing to clearly state the ACLU’s position on whether or not the Department of Justice (DOJ) should consider bringing federal civil rights or hate crimes charges as a result of the state court acquittal in the George Zimmerman case.

Even though the Supreme Court permits a federal prosecution following a state prosecution, the ACLU believes the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution protects someone from being prosecuted in another court for charges arising from the same transaction. A jury found Zimmerman not guilty, and that should be the end of the criminal case. (my emphasis.)

The letter then goes on to make two points I have made here repeatedly: (1) The Department of Justice should address the systemic problems of racial disparity inherent in the criminal justice system, including taking steps to actively put an end to racial profiling by police, and (2) the Government can teach by example. On the second point, which I raised yesterday before coming across this letter, the ACLU says:

We realize that the alleged conduct of private citizens like George Zimmerman is beyond the scope of the End Racial Profiling Act and the Department of Justice Guidance Regarding the Use of Race by Federal Law Enforcement Agencies. But average citizens can be influenced by the conduct of law enforcement, and problematic practices by public officials can increase the likelihood of bad judgment and actions by private actors. Further, the killing of Trayvon Martin has touched off a range of emotions across the country and is another harsh reminder that police actions can be motivated by racial bias. (my emphasis.)

The letter is signed by Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU's Washington Legislative Office and Jesselyn McCurdy, Senior Legislative Counsel for the Washington Legislative Office. Copies of the letter to Holder went to Charlotte Burrows, Associate Deputy Attorney General and Roy L. Austin, Jr., Deputy Assistant Attorney General, DOJ Civil Rights Division

I am all for protesting the racial disparity in our criminal justice system. But put the focus where it belongs: On arbitrary and unfair laws that disproportionately affect minorities, police misconduct, too much discretion vested in prosecutors, and overly harsh sentencing laws and guidelines. Leave George Zimmerman out of it.

And earlier, about the legacy of this case:

The problems of racial disparity and arbitrary enforcement of our criminal laws are real, systemic and need to be addressed. Criminal defense lawyers see it and fight to correct it every day. From charging decisions to plea offers to sentences, the system is not fair and everybody knows it.

But this case has never been representative of those problems. And perhaps most unfortunate of all, as a result of the false narrative created by the lawyers for grieving parents who tragically lost their son -- a narrative perpetuated by a complicit and ratings-hungry media -- any attempt at meaningful reform is likely to fall on deaf ears for years to come.

That's exactly what's happening now. Thousands may turn out to march, but millions will close their ears because of what they see as the unfair connection to George Zimmerman, a man with no history of racial animus, who a jury determined was not guilty of any crime at a trial at which no one alleged he acted out of racial animosity, and the connection to Trayvon Martin, whom they do not view as an innocent, but as someone who committed an unprovoked physical assault and unfortunately lost his life because the person he assaulted lawfully defended himself.

Others who will be turned off: Those who know that stand your ground laws had nothing to do with Zimmerman being found not guilty. He would have been found to have acted in self defense with or without the duty to retreat language, because the testimony and evidence at trial showed he had no place to retreat to once attacked by Martin. A duty to retreat presupposes a means of escape is available.

Because so many object to the use of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman as poster images for reform, it is unlikely any meaningful reform will result for the thousands of minorities who do not receive equal or blind justice and who are languishing in our prisons in disproportionate numbers. The blame for this, in my view, lies with the family lawyers, the media and the prosecutors.

This is what happens when the public is sold bubbe meisseh (fairy-tales and make-believe.) Watch this Martin family lawyer tell Greta Van Susterern: "I have a greater duty beyond being an attorney and that's to be a social engineer."

And then brag Zimmerman wouldn't have been arrested but for the public outcry. (Curiously, she says the outcry is from black people, brown people, white people, Republicans, Democrats, Christians and Muslims. Why no inclusion of Jewish people?)

Of course she doesn't mention the outcry was the result of the lawyers' misleading if not outright false portrayal of the shooting, the police investigation and the evidence, and their blatant demonization of Zimmermann in the media as a "cold-blooded murderer."

This week I also wrote about a new report about how to reduce and end systemic racial injustice by a coalition of some of the most esteemed criminal justice groups in the county. The report talks about the debate the country needs to have:

Do our laws, policies and practices reflect public consensus on these priorities? If not, what needs to change? How do we move the system away from a paradigm focused on arrest, punishment and social control of communities of color to one that focuses on healing and restoration?

How do we avoid using courts as the dumping ground for difficult or seemingly intractable social problems? (my emphasis.)

The problems that need to be addressed are the ones outlined in the report. The criminal justice system was not designed to cure every conceivable social ill. Those needing equal justice are those who are languishing in our prisons, not Trayvon Martin. Equal justice is needed for those who are profiled by police, not George Zimmerman.

As I've been saying for weeks, instead of focusing on the misfortune that befell one individual and his grieving family, stemming from a single, unplanned, spontaneous shooting on a dark and rainy night in Florida, about which public opinion will always be divided, we should demand change for the very real victims of racial injustice. At least the ACLU, after a false start, now has it right.

This was a "gated" community, right? Weren't there security guys at the gate or gates? Where were they that night? Who was supposed to know about the comings and goings of the residents? Was it possible for someone to gain entrance to the neighborhood without having to go through some sort of security? Could Zimmerman have called the gate guy and asked about someone fitting Martin's description? "Oh, yeah, that sounds like Ms. Green's guest."

I apologize if this is common knowledge - I didn't follow this the way others have; that was me who asked about the calls Zimmerman made over the years, because I didn't know the answer.

The front gate is not manned nor does it seal off the community. The front gate is usually open, the back entrance is not secured with a gate, the perimeter was not completely fenced at the time of the incident.

If you use google maps you discover Florida is a land of limestone formations, lots of lakes and sink holes define the shape of developments. The notion of a gated community in Florida seems to be quite relative, planned housing built around a lake or seasonal pond.

RTV community was a healthy mix or renters and owners and very racially and economically diverse.

The term "gated" like so many other terms deployed in the fabricated narrative was meant to imply something which turned out to incorrect.

I said it was not guarded, and the gate does not provide complete security. Unless you are going to argue about my usage of 'modicum', in which case I give up.

I live 25 miles from RTL and see developments like it every day. It is maybe a slighytly above average central FL middle class housing development. I agree that the term 'gated community' gave a false impression of opulence to those not familiar with the area.

was taken for this version of google maps, but the back gate on So. Oregon Ave. that AmericanPyscho linked below shows a closed gate. The front one is open and you can see how to slip in between the brick and the wooden/whatever posts those are.

If it's an updated picture, maybe they added a gate. I can't remember if the ones in court showed a back gate or just the entrance. These are more close up than what I've seen before except for the front.

"RTV community was a healthy mix or renters and owners and very racially and economically diverse."

The resale value of the houses decreased by half or more in the housing crash, which meant one could rent there more cheaply than before, and a lot of Section 8 housing in the area had apparently been taken out of availability as well, so you had some renters there that previously (like when the place was being designed) wouldn't have been able to afford to live there.

At least I don't remember anything during the trial about it. I think it's kind of like security at storage places. You have a code but there's not anyone watching except video, and I don't think they even had that. At least I only saw video from the clubhouse.

Maybe they had it and it wasn't working, but I honestly don't know even about cameras.

Anne - I didn't know the makeup of those calls until tonight either, so don't feel bad. In the trial, as far as I can remember, they only went back until August.

I also don't remember seeing fencing other than the gate. So I don't even know if the place was fenced in. I think it wasn't, but I'm not positive.

At least when I am not on my sailboat in the Keys where I am now. But mine is a little different. One road in/out going past a long time resident's house. He and his wife are retired, like me, and will often call the police if they see a stranger. The house also overlooks the gated and locked pool and multiple homeowners have called police about non residents jumping the fence to use that pool.

Any lawyer will confirm a pool in Florida is viewed by the courts as an 'invitational hazzard' and should be fenced and locked.

I suspect that is why the only security tape in this case was from the club house where I expect the pool is.

HOA and condo laws, declarations, and rules are a real trip. Even if there are no locked gates simply posting a no tresspassing notice has legal ramifications.

The available evidence seems to point to Martin gaining entrance to the RTL via a break in the fencing at the northwest corner of the complex, not via one of the 2 official gates (which to my knowledge were not guarded).

There was no "fencing", so no "break" along the side of RATL between Oregon Avenue and S. Oregon Avenue until after the shooting when they installed what I call a metal railing.

There was no evidence of where Martin entered the Retreat. Conjecturing from where GZ claims to first see him, he could have entered through one of the so called "short cuts" albeit the one at the side of Taffe's is not imo likely as; a) it is not in line with any exit he had from Colonial Village if he walked through there, b) it is further in from Oregon Av. if he was returning along the road, c) it is not in line with RVC towards the clubhouse the route GZ claimed TM walked once inside RATL, d) it is at the bottom of a very inclined possibly muddy terrain which to try to tackle at night with no torch and in what look like spanking new white shoes imo is too bizarre.

There was no "fencing", so no "break" along the side of RATL between Oregon Avenue and S. Oregon Avenue until after the shooting when they installed what I call a metal railing.

Actually, there is fencing on the back sides of the homes. You are correct that there isn't a separate perimeter fence, but there is fencing all along the back sides of the homes, which serves as fencing for the back sides of the complex.

Perhaps you interpreted my comment about a "break in the fencing" to mean "broken fence." "Break in the fencing merely means a "gap." Does my comment now make more sense to you?

There was no evidence of where Martin entered the Retreat. Conjecturing from where GZ claims to first see him, he could have entered through one of the so called "short cuts" albeit the one at the side of Taffe's is not imo likely

Actually there was evidence from GZ's claim of where he first saw TM, introduced by the prosecution when they introduced GZ's statements to the police. The jury was free to believe, disbelieve, or consider it of little importance to the case. Please note that I most assuredly did not say that the evidence (based on GZ's statements) proved anything, only that it suggested where TM entered the complex.

If you are referring to a wall with a hedge on top as shown in thethe Bing map on TL's photo bucket that is not a fence but a retaining wall for the higher terrace on which the block is built, and it has a hedge barrier on top presumably to prevent accidents which if you use Bing using "bird's eye view", and turn the dial so as North is to your left) so as you can observe it from the other side you can see more clearly how it was constructed as the hedge still hadn't grown at the time of their maps.

I know what a "break" in a fence is, indeed proportionately it could well be more gardens, (front and back) are fenced off in the UK than in the US where you have a lot of open "yards". But in this case "there is fencing all along the back sides of the homes, which serves as fencing for the back sides of the complex." is incorrect.

I have to disagree, because there was NO evidence presented at trial on where TM entered RATL that night. GZ never said TM entered by Taffe's house merely that he saw him standing in Taffe's at the front. There has been plenty of conjecture, if you

The "fence" you see on the escarpment is a) is not a "fence" more a protective balcony to prevent people falling down what is quite a steep escarpment, b) for there to be a "break" or a "gap" in a fence it has to continue on each side which in this case it does not as is clear in the Bing Maps view relevant to the cut by Taffe's house as there the land is flat and

So sorry. I meant to shorten my previous reply to you, add another link or two, and delete last paragraph which repeats the first. I also needed to correct a mistake, i.e. the hedge is grown in the Bing maps, but what you see better in Bing is a higher terrace further down from Taffe's with a retaining structure topped with what looks like a wire safety barrier and trelis for growing a hedge similar to that near Taffe's... but NO fence! Check out TL's library page 9 and three relevant photos on page 11 which leaves all pretty clear.

I didn't finish the 2nd to last paragraph either, and I don't recall what I was going to say except that conjectures abound, e.g. according to Taffe the FBI thought he entered through the cut through nearest the road and affirms there was no fence (see from 0:48 to around 3:00 of the video "Taking the Taaffe Tour at Twin Lakes"). In any case how TM entered RATL was, iirc, NOT in evidence, (GZ merely said he saw TM in his front yard) so there is nothing to say he didn't take the short cut nearest the road and walk up to Taffe's, but that's where it started to rain harder so he turned back and went via the mailboxes to take cover.

...from where it's theorized Martin re-entered the neighborhood is not THE cut-through, but is on the other side of the neighborhood from it.

The cut-through is either the portion of Twin Trees Lane that runs west to east and on which Zimmerman's truck was parked when he got out of it, or it's the east-west stretch of sidewalk that forms the top of the "T".

as a cuthrough -- they weren't confusing it with the cutthrough where GZ parked near TTL. It may not be an accurate description, but they weren't confusing the two. They used cutthrough to mean the shortcut.

to non-emergency when he called to tell them he spotted the guy who matched Beltaran's description of the guy who broke into her house that he would meet officers at the back gate to let them in because there is no code there.

Dispatcher: Okay. Do you want to leave your name or number?
George: I can leave my name and my number; and, I'll actually be at the back gate to let the
officers in because there is no code there

So the back must have had some kind of barrier to get in through the back. I thought you needed to punch a code to get into the front, but I'm not sure about that.

And with the Florida property crash, which affected that community, I read but not in mainstream media -- a context of class and economic decline that is ignored to emphasize race -- I weary of description of it as a "wealthy" community, an assumption based on misunderstanding the meaning of "gated" there.

in that gated community, townhouse sold for $250,000 and drop during the crash to $100,000.
I wonder how many owners felt pressured to settle with the Martins because they were underwater and unable to sell their property or renegotiate mortgage terms due to the outstanding suit.

Indeed there is no boundary "fence" around RATL. Along the roads there is a brick wall, and now since the shooting they have installed a tall metal railing where there was nothing before. Taffe confirmed this in interviews and there are plenty of walk through videos on YT where you can check this out.

so you can view better that what you believe is a fence is in fact NOT a fence, merely a series of tall posts with a fan trellis attached, as used for fanning and/or bushing shrubs into a flat screening hedge, and what in the UK we refer to as espaliering and/or pleaching. As you can see there are no horizontals between posts to make a "fence" so you can walk between them as Taffe noted.

In the uk we call them (wrought) iron railings, and it was erected within a year of the shooting, because 7 months ago the video "Taking the Taaffe Tour at Twin Lakes" has Taffe commenting on them around 1:20.

"It started to rain so he decided to walk through another complex because it was raining to hard. He started walking then noticed someone was following him. Then he decided to find a shortcut cause the man wouldn't follow him."

would place TM taking the shortcut by Taffe's house AFTER he noticed GZ following him, therefore by logic it would place GZ following TM in his car from OUTSIDE of RATL.

IIRC, not even the State tried to show GZ was following TM from BEFORE he entered RATL, so perhaps you mean something else or I missed some evidence and/or RJ changing the event sequence of the shortcut. Could you be confusing RJ's "shortcut" with when she said TM was going to "run from the back"?

it was raining so he took a shortcut to the mailboxes of RATL. She denied he went to another complex first, but couldn't explain why it took him almost 40 minutes to get to the Complex. She also had never been there and didn't know where shortcuts or the mailboxes were.

WEST: So knowing that Mr. Martin left the store at 6:23:49, or thereabouts, and Mr. Zimmerman saw him in the retreat at twin lakes complex at 7:09:34, are you able to tell me about what you and Mr. Martin talked about during that time period and where, if any, where he went other than to the complex where his father's fiancee was staying?
JEANTEL: That night?
WEST: Yes.
JEANTEL: The rain had got him. The rain, the rain got -- he got caught by the rain. He was at mails ping place, the mailing area.
WEST: Did he tell you then as he left the store that it started to rain?
JEANTEL: Yes.
WEST: And that he ran to the -- or walked quickly to the mail area?
JEANTEL: Shortcut.
WEST: Pardon me?
JEANTEL: A shortcut to the mailing area.
WEST: A shortcut from where to where? Do you have any idea?
JEANTEL: No.
WEST: But he told you that he was going to run over to the mail area?
JEANTEL: Yes.
WEST: Do you know if that was the mail area that was in the complex where he was staying, or was that, perhaps, in another complex in between the story and where he was staying?
JEANTEL: The complex that he was staying on. Because I had asked him where he was at. He say he's in a place where his father is staying at.
WEST: It's also been indicated that it's about a mile, give or take a little, from the store to the complex where he was staying.
JEANTEL: No, I don't know where -- I don't know -- I never been there.
WEST: You don't have any idea, then, what the distance might be?
JEANTEL: No. I never been there.
WEST: So what I'm trying to understand from you at this point is, do you have any idea where Trayvon Martin went between leaving the store at about 6:23 in the after -- in the late afternoon before the phone call was made at 7:09:34?

George's cell phone records show he called the non-emergency number at 7:08 (they didn't pick up until 7:09:34) and TM didn't start walking back from the store until 6:29 or 6:30, so that's still almost 40 minutes to go from the 7-11 to Taaffe's house (another view of shortcut)which is less than 1 mile.

Youtube, most of the walkers took ten to twelve minutes to get to the complex from the 7-11. If Trayvon had gone right, instead of left to the mailboxes, it's doubtful George Zimmerman would have ever seen him.

that in the Obama administration the proper greeting among non-profits is "welcome to the veal pen".

I have little doubt they, like many other Dem-leaning organizations, got the word early (like, spring 09) that supporting Obama was the sine qua non for future corporate donorship. Not to mention that the ACLU lost no small amount in the Madoff scandal and probably (I haven't checked the massive dockets in the Bankruptcy court) got hit for even more in the clawback suits.

In other words, they were being led by their funders until their members started screaming.

The point is, from minute one of this Obama's thrust has not been to improve race relations. It has been to attack "stand your ground" laws specifically and self-defense laws generally. The appeals to "my son would have looked like Trayvon" and more recently "I would have looked like Trayon 35 years ago" were cynical ploys to rally the many people who are still in love with the image of him to follow him in his ongoing crusade for gun control (among other things). Given that the Heller and MacDonald decisions both defined self-defense as a "fundamental right" protected by the Constitution, his approach is to try to so limit and cabin that right as to make it about as useful as the reporter's privilege and the First Amendment when applied to non-corporate publishers (wikileaks, I'm looking at you).

I'm reading it now. I fully agree that the Feds trying someone for the same offense is an abridgement of the Constitution, and it has long bothered me that they can get away with it. Hopefully the Court will so rule in this case, and put an end to this violation of rights.

...the same kind of dynamic that occurs in every jury chamber in the country every day as to give and take, consideration and ultimate agreement on a verdict happened here in this case? And Ben Jealous and the Crump brigade are going to manufacture that into a racial thing too? This is just getting sick.

and the total number of calls was stated in the trial, as I recall? And I know that I read it elsewhere before that -- probably here -- as I have tried for weeks to clarify these facts with so many people who just want to parrot media misreporting.

And I also remember a discussion here, months ago, that clarified that he said "f*cking punks." That also then was reported elsewhere, more widely.

I can only conclude, then, that the continued misreporting is not incompetence but willful by media. Most of the reporting is national -- AP, networks, etc. -- and, unlike small-town media, the nationals have sufficient staff to get it correct.

They must not want to do so. They must like the the ratings for repeating untruths -- and/or this is entertainment for the masses to divert them from the lack of jobs, the class wars, and the economic decline far beyond a few blocks in Florida.

Unfortunately, on that and the other misinformation constantly perpetuated elsewhere, I fear that it is all too relevant in communities like mine, where the lies were repeated yesterday by civil rights "leaders" who are proving to be mindless followers.

Reading the reportage today, I crossed a few more off of my ever-shorter list of leadership for whom I had held hope. They were getting much wrong even on some of the facts reportedly correctly in media.

They're normal people who don't realize the news is mostly propaganda.

We've all believe that our news isn't propaganda and that the US doesn't have a system of propaganda like Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany did. But we do. Almost news is propaganda serving what group or another. Where as the soviets would simply made up the "truth" from whole cloth and the Nazi would stage false flag operations our preferred system of propaganda is the slant. Instead of lying about the facts our propaganda organs leave facts out and distort other facts. Instead of Zimmerman being beaten by martin we go right from Zimmerman following martin to Zimmerman shooting Martin. Instead of Zimmerman being asked about Martin's race and Zimmerman not being sure right away we have Zimmerman making it a racial issue right away though the media editing the phone call.

Most people just believe the slant as presented because why would the news deceive us? It's hard for average people to fight propaganda when they don't even realize that it's propaganda.

low-information sort; these are well-educated and usually well-informed sorts who abhor squawk radio and tv and almost always are the first to question nonsense in the media and media frenzies. They well know when they see propaganda in other cases.

the manslaughter question was sent out for whomever the "holdout" was. She said when they couldn't answer the non-specific question, they read the law in the instructions and that answered the question.

I'm not sure how out of the norm that is, but I can see it being on every news show tomorrow. If it's just normal juror interaction, they're doing a real disservice to that jury (any jury really). I was hoping Judge Nelson could keep their identities secret forever, but I read she can't. It sounds like friends and relatives have already outed her anyway.

is that the case would likely end up at the Supreme Court. This means the Court that just undermined the voting rights act would get a swipe at civil rights and hate crime laws. And they would do so on a case where the foundation for the charges for extremely weak, giving them a good basis for challenging those laws as intrinsically prone to abuse.

but haven't yet given it enough thought to decide whether I agree for sure. I'm not sympathetic to the notion that specifically racial mass murder like Hitler is worse than largely random mass murder like Stalin.

That said, I don't trust this court getting its hands on these issues, especially if the case before it is as weak as one based on Zimmerman would have to be. I would have to give more thought to what exactly I would expect Scalia to pull, but I expect it would amount to using the fact that this case as a civil rights matter is largely a political stunt to argue that criticism of racial bias in the legal system is intrinsically a political interference in the proper business of the court, and therefore never to be given legal standing. I'm worried this case could provide a pretext for ruling out a lot of challenges to the legal system based on the premise that it exhibits racial bias.

So called "hate crimes" not only serve to criminalize thought and First Amendment expression, even if it is ugly and detestable expression, they also place crimes against one class as being worse than crimes against another similarly situated class. Both are patently objectionable results Constitutionally.

If all you do is think about committing a hate crime, you can't be charged with anything. Like other crimes, there must be an act associated with the intent.

BTW - If they are "patently objectionable Constitutionally", how do you suppose they haven't been struck down since they were first enacted in 1871? In fact, in Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the USSC unanimously held that penalty-enhancement hate crime statutes do not conflict with free speech rights, because they do not punish an individual for exercising freedom of expression. To the contrary, they held that such laws allow courts to consider motive when sentencing someone for a crime, which is entirely permissible under the Constitution.

Particularly will they be verifying, contradicting or further delving into Martins phone, text,email and social postings as well as interviewing social media friends who have posted familiar comments on his pages?

If the AG gets his Federal trial I don't think he can rely on the defense having insufficient access to exculpatory evidence again.

It would be in the states interest to uncover the veracity of that evidence

Could this be related to Sabrina's recent admission that TM may not have been a Saint.

The role of the prosecutor is to prosecute, not defend. In order to prosecute, the feds need to write a paper that makes allegations of fact that it claims it will prove at trial, where one of the allegations is that Zimmerman was animated to action by racial animus. I see no barrier to that, any more than the state had a barrier on the evidence. Just claim Zimmerman's frustration had reached the boiling point (depraved mind), and that his frustration was racially based.

The deciding factor for pressing charges will be the size and apparent determination of the public mob.

There is no reason to think a federal judge would allow the evidence (relating to Martin) that Nelson found inadmissible. The role of the court is to convict while giving the appearance of a fair trial.

the dispatcher asked George what ethnicity Trayvon was, George replied "he looks blacK" How can there be a racist claim when the alleged racist, part black himself, isn't certain if Trayvon really was black?

The threshold for bringing charges isn't the strength of the evidence, or even the presence of it. The prosecutor puts his tale before the jury, and lets the jury decide if the evidence is sufficient to support a conviction.

I'm not saying that is how the criminal justice system is supposed to work, my point is that it can be put in motion for show, and the prosecutors are willing to put on a show if enough people demand it.

If you meant that the NYT printed articles that indicated some people thought GZ was a racist, that's just reporting. But, your post reads as if the NYT itself never authored "an article or column that did not claim GZ was a racist."

If that's what you meant, it's simply not true. If you have proof, please show it. If not, I would ask that you clarify it.

The difference, as Chauncey DeVega made clear on Saturday, is that when white men commit mass murder we don't hear how their skin color, their maleness, or their social class were contributing factors to their acts. As Peggy McIntosh famously wrote in her White Privilege Checklist, we see whites as individuals whose moral state reflects their individual will. In other words, white men kill simply because they are "sick" or "evil." When men of color murder, it is because they are both those things and because of factors uniquely attributable to their race....

...White men from upper middle-class backgrounds expect to be both welcomed and heard wherever they go. When that sense of entitlement gets frustrated, as it can for a host of complex psychological reasons, it is those same hyper-privileged men who are the most likely to react with violent, rage-filled indignation

factual, well sourced answers to your questions is rather annoying to say the least. If you do not want factual answers to a question, then can I suggest that you only ask questions of those people on the site who agree 100% with whatever your position happens to be.

no one should give a 1 rating based on point of view. A 1 is for a troll comment or site violator or an unintelligible comment. I can't erase ratings for individual comments, only all ratings by a particular commenter.

out of pure ignorance. They simply did not do their homework. I noticed that most of them were sincere. But they were ignorant and they just repeated the same crap story-line everyone else was telling.
This is the problem with the 24/7 news networks with their overpaid infotainment stars.

how can you claim they are not biased and in someone's pocket? Not all of them, but for many it is a combination of all, so some of the above. Fox, not biased? MSNBC, not a hotbed of liberal idiots who are so open minded their brains fell out? I have two words for you, Piers Morgan.
Don't get me wrong, there are a few very good people on msnbc, but all of them hit a wall they can not see over at some point.
Fox, I can't speak to, you couldn't pay me to watch it. The outright bold faced lies I have heard there inspire in me feelings of anarchy that are not healthy.

Nah, seems more like a global 'trend'. You know: "A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes".

As Bob Somerby, among others, has pointed out for years, if fake facts are repeated sufficiently often, they'll eventually be regarded as true facts. And that's when getting out the real truth becomes a task almost always doomed to fail. :-(

titled No One Fact Checks Any More. The article was about an AP article reporting a meteor that struck Chehalis, Washington. It took me about 10 minutes to debunk the story. The person reporting it did not exist. The Mayor of Chehalis denied that there had been any such report and said he had no knowledge of any reports of damage in the area even though the reported size of the meteor would have caused extensive damage and death in the surrounding area.

The AP later withdrew the story. The AP subscribers who picked up the story later deleted it but never printed retractions. So any screenshots or printouts of the story would still remain with no correcting information.

Note that there was nothing controversial about the story; no politics, no deaths reported, no bias angle to report, no special interest group angle, etc., etc. Yet they still printed a complete falsehood without even bothering to do 10 minutes of fact checking.

The fact checking took place after the story had been published.

Everyone knows that retractions of falsehoods are never as widely disseminated as the original falsehood. That's exactly what's going on in the Zimmerman case. The original lies are still believed by many, and the corrections, if they have been made, are ignored or not noticed.

A clear example of this is the "white Hispanic" label. Had anyone ever heard that label used before? That was the media's "correction" when it was "discovered" that George was Hispanic, not white.

George is half white. Obama is half white. Yet they don't call Obama a "white black". People would laugh if they did. It's silly. Yet the "white Hispanic" label has now entered the lexicon, and George will forever be labeled that way simply because the media couldn't be bothered to do any fact checking before "reporting" that he was white.

In Latin culture, George would be known as a mestizo - a mixture of several races. If the media wanted to be accurate, they could call him a mestizo Hispanic. But accuracy obviously isn't important to them.

George Zimmerman, is as white as Obama is. His mother's side of the family is black and native american. Afro-Peruvian is black just like Afro-American is black. Look at the family pictures.
The person you are answering may not be aware of census questions, but you may not be aware that those questions are really pretty lame. They just do not fit anyone except white people.

has been used for the likes of Cameron Diaz, Charlie Sheen, and Frankie Muniz, none of whom resemble George Z much. He has a German name, so initial news reports pegged him as white, and it fit the narrative so well.

About blaming 'the media' for "whipping up racism issues" or "misinforming the public resulting in pro-TM protests".

To my eyes and ears, the media has fallen along the same fault lines it always does. Listen to hannity, Limbaugh, etc and you'll get pro-GZ spin. Listen to maddow and others, you'll get the other spin. This case hasn't changed any of that. It's all very predictable and there is spin and bias on both sides, as per usual.

That includes the usual blogs, and their typical biases. I've seen no surprises here through any of this.

if you separated supposed "news" organizations from opinion shows. Hannity, for example, isn't a news show any more than Piers Morgan is. The "reporting" on this case wasn't done by talk shows. It was done by supposed "news" organizations, but those have been co-opted by political interests for a long time, so it's not surprising you might consider Hannity news. It's almost a distinction without a difference.

Nevertheless, even the 'actual news organizations' have their typical slants and biases. And they have not been very surprising relative to this case. The sides taken in this case are completely predictable for most media outlets.

The same for the blogs, and even us commenters on blogs for that matter.

and inaccuracies in media that I might normally trust, such as the NYT. I do think this case was different, in part because TM's parents had lawyers and a PR person early on, and neither GZ's family, nor Sanford authorities were talking.

More than half of this Friday's program was devoted to the remarks of Holder and Obama related to the case. I guess the Sunday talk shows will be similar. Pat Buchanan thought that Obama's remarks were incendiary and wrong while Eleanor Clift, Mort Zuckerman, Clarance Page and John McLaughlin thought they were spot on and showed presidential leadership.

so that we could deal with the statements we hear over and over. Examples include: GZ provoked the fight. TM was armed only with fruit juice and Skittles. GZ would have been acquitted if the PD had done a better job of interviewing witnesses and collecting evidence.

I think that many of the people making emotional statements about this case care much about legal definition. For many, the fact that GZ followed TM at all, is a provocation. And, I am not sure that you are going to be able to make a case for the Sanford PD, as they were incredibly sloppy. I would even guess that had the victim been a white person wearing a suit, that they would have not treated the murder scene so casually, racism? maybe..

So, as well intended your call for a FAQ sheet is, I doubt that those who are angry about the verdict will gain any solace from the legal facts of the case.

From all the disclosure I read and saw, the SPD may not have done a CSI like perfect job, but it was not that bad at all as homicide investigations go. Now the medical examiner's office had some serious lapses, but that is a separate entity, not SPD. SPD marked out the scene, collected evidence, collected audio and video evidence, collected digital evidence on both Zimmerman and Martin etc., took a boatload of witness and neighbor interviews that were competently done, and grilled Zimmerman several different ways and times.

Were there a few lapses, yes but overall it was far from the worst homicide investigation I ever seen and was easily in the median or better range. Now, what Corey and FDLE etc did once they took it all over is a different matter, but I did not find the original SPD job anywhere near as deficient as has been commonly bandied about in the press and among many commentators.

Well not sure who was responsible. I thought forensic unit was part of the Sanford Police. The clothes put in plastic, bagging the hands, and general forensics seemed to be pretty sloppy. OK, I have never followed a murder case, so I do not know what is standard, but it seemed that a lot of info was lacking.

And I have not read any news about the case. All my info has been from TL.

simply is no evidence that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after he said "okay." His breathing slowed, the wind noise died down, and he appeared to be conversing rather casually with the dispatcher. Add the fact that multiple witnesses had the confrontation beginning west of the T, than moving south. Basically, after roughly six minutes after Martin was said to have run, Zimmerman was about the same place the phone conversation ended . He claimed he was heading for his vehicle. If you're a detective, there's no way to prove Zimmerman was lying. What did they expect the SPD to do?

Although, I guess it depends on what you mean by "certain situations". Men going into stores being followed by the shopkeeper just because they're me? No. A woman (or a man) being nervous about a man following them? Sure. Then again, ...

: the act or process of extrapolating information about a person based on known traits or tendencies <consumer profiling>; specifically : the act of suspecting or targeting a person on the basis of observed characteristics or behavior <racial profiling>

Shoplifting is one of the few crimes in which women's rate of offense (or teen girls', anyway) probably exceeds that of men. It would be unsafe for citizens not to consider men, especially strangers, more of a threat to them, and bad policy for the police not to consider men more likely than women to commit most types of crimes.

If Oscar Pristorius gunned his girl friend down after a heated fight, in that gated community where Trayvon Martin was killed #instead of in South Africa#, could his legal defense team use Florida's self defense and SYG laws to get him acquitted, arguing that he feared for his life during the fight he had with his girl friend? Note that his girl friend is dead and nobody else other than him #since there were no witnesses# knows what really happened that night.

comments people have referred to. I also deleted a ridiculously long comment reprinting an article from somewhere. I didn't read it. This space is for comments not reprinting articles or documents you read elsewhere.